Topic: How will the PS3 be able to compete against the more advanced Wii 2?

[Chozo Ghost]

Sony has said the PS3 will have a 10 year life-cycle, which is probably going to be true, but if the Wii2 comes out next year as predicted this means the PS3 will be competing directly with it. The PS3 is struggling against the technically inferior (albeit motion controlled) Wii system, so I'm wondering how in the world they will be able to compete against a Wii2 that will likely have more advanced tech specs.

See, the PS3 came out in late 2006 which will be 5 years old when the Wii2 (supposedly) comes out. This means the Wii2 will be able to take advantage of newer technology and probably trump it in processing speed, RAM, graphics, and all that goodness. The PS3 is currently the most powerful system on the market (in terms of specs), but this probably won't be the case once the next system comes out.

Odds are Microsoft will have their successor out in the near future as well. The 360 is the oldest system on the market, and it just makes perfect sense they would want the Xbox 720 to be out as quick as possible just like the 360 was first out. What this means is the PS3 with its 10 year life span will be the most technically inferior system available. So how can the PS3 survive?

Sony's 10 year lifecycle strategy would have worked very well if the PS3 enjoyed the sort of install base the PS2 had, but it doesn't. The PS3 has struggled since day one, and is in last place in the competition. So how is this going to work for Sony?

Sony could scrap their 10 year plan and push out a PS4 earlier than they planned in order to keep up with the competition, but this presents some problems in itself. Sega did that by scrapping the Saturn and rushing out the Dreamcast, but we all know how that worked out. So Sony is not in a very enviable position, imho.

How can a 5 year old PS3 compete against a more advanced Wii2 and Xbox 720? Especially when it is the last place (in market share) system. That is my question to you all.

[broodwars]

It'll compete with it in the same arena it's already kicking its ass: its gaming library.  The PS3 already has the better library, IMO, and that's just with 3 years under its belt and a very slow start.  I can only imagine the kinds of games we'll be seeing 5 years down the road once the 3rd parties are much more comfortable with the system and its quirks (much as they eventually grew accustomed to the "hard to develop on" PS2).  When Wii 2 releases, its tech will probably be on-par or a little better than the PS3's so barring any gimmicky new interface tech (which Sony could always reverse-engineer and replicate as a PS3 add-on) multi-platform development between the two shouldn't be terribly difficult.  The Wii 2 would eventually trump it, but the PS3 would put up a good fight in its waning years, assuming Sony turns out to actually be serious about the whole "10 year life-cycle" thing.  Besides, the PS4 would probably be more than on the horizon at that point, and perhaps by then the marketplace will have shifted away from Nintendo.

[ThePerm]

The wii 2 will not come out next year, maybe 2012. They are not going to pull a Sega Saturn. Nintendo wants a long lifespan for the Wii and its going to pull some punches before it pulls the plug. The next Xbox could come out next year though. Expect Colors and Price drops to keep the momentum going, plus games we have never heard of to fill in next year and the first quarter of 2012. Probably 1 big game this year(zelda), 3 big games in 2011, and one last hurrah in 2012. Hopefully, from now till november 2012 they'll make some deals with some third parties to get some heavy hitters. However, I expect there to be practically nothing (from Nintendo) coming out from summer 2012 till November. Nintendo likes to just drop consoles, but Sony likes to bleed every last cent out of them. Ps4 will come out before Ps3 is done.

[Chozo Ghost]

It'll compete with it in the same arena it's already kicking its ass: its gaming library.

But most of the PS3's quality games are multi-platform, and if the Wii 2 is more advanced than (or at least on par with) the PS3, 3rd parties will have no excuse not to bring games to the Wii 2 as well. No longer will anyone be able to say these games can't be done because the Nintendo console "can't do HD" or "can't have as many enemies on screen", or whatever. Those would become bull**** arguments instantly.

So in that case all Sony would have going for it would be 1st party Sony exclusives, and that really is no match for 1st party Nintendo exclusives.

I'm also not concerned about Sony ripping off Nintendo ideas, because even if they do Nintendo will have a few years head start with it until Sony figures out how to reverse engineer and replicate it. Plus Sony would be forced to offer it as an add-on, and as a rule add-ons seldom take off. There's no guarantee Sony's Wiimote rip-off is going to make a huge dent, for example. For one thing, it costs an extra $100. So if Nintendo comes up with another huge innovation you can't really count on Sony being able to rip it off without a hitch.

Nintendo also might be wise and have some huge innovation integrated right into the console itself, and that way Sony won't be able to just copy it with a simple add-on.

Edit: I also don't understand how Sony is able to rip-off Nintendo's innovation generation after generation. Sure, its embarassing and makes them look bad to just steal innovations like that, but from a legal stand point it shouldn't even be allowed. Whatever happened to intellectual property laws? Nintendo was stupid for not suing Sony for ripping off things like their analog stick and now the wiimote. Maybe Japanese law doesn't work like American law, but I don't get that.

[Shorty McNostril]

They will do exactly the same as they have done with the PS2.  Sony said it will have a 10 year life, they didn't say there wouldn't be a PS4 in that time.  They will launch a PS4 and give it all the limelight and glory, but continue to support the PS3 for the 10 years, (if it lasts that long).  The PS3 will be their main source of profit while they lose all their money on the 4.  But not as much as the 3 assuming they have learned anything from their arrogance.

[broodwars]

It'll compete with it in the same arena it's already kicking its ass: its gaming library.

But most of the PS3's quality games are multi-platform, and if the Wii 2 is more advanced than (or at least on par with) the PS3, 3rd parties will have no excuse not to bring games to the Wii 2 as well. No longer will anyone be able to say these games can't be done because the Nintendo console "can't do HD" or "can't have as many enemies on screen", or whatever. Those would become bull**** arguments instantly.

You're assuming that 3rd parties will even want to develop for Nintendo's next console.  I think the poor sales of Wii 3rd party software and the lack of interest by Nintendo in doing anything about that is going to have longer ramifications than is immediately obvious.  Nintendo is doing very little to maintain good relations with its fellow developers, which while not an immediate problem with Nintendo already owning this console generation easily is probably going to bite them in the ass next generation.  Sony will probably have recovered by then from its financial problems from the early years of the PS3 and will be in a strong position to retain exclusives, and let's not forget about Microsoft either.  Sony and Microsoft will have had many years to shore up their core user base, while meanwhile Nintendo will be struggling to convince its Blue Ocean crowd it needs another console.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Wii2 will strike while the iron is still hot. that will be Japan Xmas 2011 and hopefully world wide. If anyone thinks that Nintendo isn't blowing their load this year on the Wii and that they have something big planned for late 2011, and well into 2012 then we envision 2 very different futures.

Sony will not last till 2015 before releasing a new system. If when Nintendo announces Wii2 at E3 2011, Sony will be prepping the PS4 just as MS will be ready push the Xbx720. Just remember that the PS2 is currently enjoying it's 10 year strategy and that didn't stop a PS3 from happening.

[Chozo Ghost]

You're assuming that 3rd parties will even want to develop for Nintendo's next console.  I think the poor sales of Wii 3rd party software and the lack of interest by Nintendo in doing anything about that is going to have longer ramifications than is immediately obvious.  Nintendo is doing very little to maintain good relations with its fellow developers, which while not an immediate problem with Nintendo already owning this console generation easily is probably going to bite them in the ass next generation.  Sony will probably have recovered by then from its financial problems from the early years of the PS3 and will be in a strong position to retain exclusives, and let's not forget about Microsoft either.  Sony and Microsoft will have had many years to shore up their core user base, while meanwhile Nintendo will be struggling to convince its Blue Ocean crowd it needs another console.

You're making it sound like Sony and MS are going to team up and conspire to undermine Nintendo. That's actually nothing further from the truth. Sony and MS are rivals. More so than either of them are against Nintendo. Sony and MS are fighting for more than just video games here, whereas VG is all Nintendo cares about.

So let's assume you're right and Nintendo won't be able to crush the PS3 in terms of third party support. Okay, fine. But what about Microsoft? Their Xbox 720 will be out in the near future (I predict), and if the Wii 2 isn't a force to undermine the PS3, you can be sure the 720 will be.

See, that's why I'm saying the future looks bleak for Sony. Not only do they have the Wii 2 to worry about, but they also have to worry about whatever MS has up its sleeve. Unless they rush out a PS4 earlier than they claimed (which makes them look very bad) then there's no way they can compete with the more technologically advanced titans.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Just because they release a PS4 before 10 years is up doesn't mean the PS3 isn't going forward with a 10 year strategy. The PS2 is on it's 10th year right now and the PS3 existed going on 4 years ago.

I predict a Wii2 in 2011 and a Xbox720 rushed to happen 2011 too(but probably doesn't make it on time) PS4 will probably happen in 2012/13 depending on if MS gets a new system out and how powerful a Wii2 actually is.

[Chozo Ghost]

Just because they release a PS4 before 10 years is up doesn't mean the PS3 isn't going forward with a 10 year strategy. The PS2 is on it's 10th year right now and the PS3 existed going on 4 years ago.

The PS2 might be in its 10th year, but it sold far more than the PS3 has, or ever will.

If Sony releases a PS4 in the near future then they will need to throw their support behind it 100% in order to gain momentum. If they support the PS3 at all then it means they can't support the PS4 100% so that would make the PS3 like an anchor that weighs them down. It would make no sense at all. That's why Nintendo dropped the GBA pretty quick once the DS was released, because the PSP was only months away and Nintendo's success wasn't really guaranteed in those early days of the handheld wars. Good thing they did, because if Nintendo kept a "third pillar" strategy going, that third pillar would have just been an anchor holding them down.

[SixthAngel]

The entire "10 year lifespan" arguement was based off ps3 having really good graphics that will last.

It turns out graphics aren't why people buy games and it isn't why new ones are released.  New consoles are usually released when they start selling less.  By the time the next Wii is released the ps3 should be in this downward "old hat" phase too.

I think Wii 2 isn't coming out until probably fall 2012 (almost 3 years from now).  The number one reason is that Nintendo makes money off software and even if they manage to repeat the extreme success of the Wii it will be less profitable because of the higher specs.  Especially when the Wii basically broke records this christmas.

I predict that this year they "blow their load" like BnM said and then next year has a few minor (ie not Zelda) releases while riding the sales (long tails) of all the games released this year and hopefully localized rpgs.  They also throw out the vitality sensor to push the Wii as a fitness/rehab machine since I doubt it has big potential.  They announce that the next Wii will be released sometime in fall 2012 or later making Wii sales immediately dry up for the next 7 months since everybody knows the successor it coming.

That's why Nintendo dropped the GBA pretty quick once the DS was released, because the PSP was only months away and Nintendo's success wasn't really guaranteed in those early days of the handheld wars. Good thing they did, because if Nintendo kept a "third pillar" strategy going, that third pillar would have just been an anchor holding them down.

This 3rd pillar "strategy" was just Nintendo's escape route in case the DS failed.  I think I called it at the time too but they never had any intention of having a DS and Gameboy going at the same time, they just said it so if the DS flopped they could come back with the next Gameboy.

The chances of people wanting to buy the ps3 in its tenth year at the same level as the ps2 in its twilight is going to be slim to none so I doubt stores would even offer to sell new ones.

[D_Average]

It'll be able to compete because teh casuals won't be able to comprehend why a Wii 2 exists, let alone buy one. Unless Wii 2 offers some entirley new experience like virtual reality I just can't see Nintendo hitting the jackpot again. Meanwhile core gamers will be salivating over the next power house console, ready to make a day one purchase.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

There is no Wii2, only the Nintendo 128.

Wii is on the 15 year plan.  5th pillar 4life.

[Ian Sane]

See, the PS3 came out in late 2006 which will be 5 years old when the Wii2 (supposedly) comes out. This means the Wii2 will be able to take advantage of newer technology and probably trump it in processing speed, RAM, graphics, and all that goodness.

I think this is honestly a huge assumption.  I would not be surprised if the Wii2 was actually inferior to the PS3 in terms of hardware and just relied on some new gimmick to stand out.  It's probably most realistic to assume Nintendo will roughly match the other consoles but I doubt they'll top them.  These days Nintendo's attitude with hardware is to just go with what's good enough.  And we know they'll be willing to skimp on the hardware to make a bigger profit margin on console sales.  Nintendo will embrace better technology entirely because they are forced to, not because they want to gain some advantage.
 
The PS3 struggled initially because of the insanely high price.  Even when I thought they had a pretty good lineup of games I waited until the price cut.  I had to.  It was just too damn expensive.  Sony went with such powerful hardware that I don't see how they could release a new console without having that same problem where the console just costs too much.  The PS3 Slim was like a second launch.  They finally started to go somewhere.  To piss that away so soon would make no sense.  Sony has to give the PS3 ten years since they only just recently have been able to sell it at an affordable price.  And if Nintendo topped them how could Nintendo make that at a good price?  The PS3 is $300 so a superior Wii2 would probably be more than that.
 
Move is Sony's next gen.  It changes the PS3 enough to keep things going longer and puts it in competition with the Wii.  I think this is the only thing they could do.  If graphics don't matter how do you go next gen?  Adding motion control is the only way to do it.
 
The thing is the PS3 has the better lineup.  Nintendo may make the best games in the world but with their horrible third party support, they've got the weakest overall lineup.  The Wii has overachieved and the PS3 has underachieved.  We assume that on equal footing the Wii2 will have comparible third party support.  But that is still an assumption and Sony and MS have a big head start on the games.
 
One thing that I think benefits Sony is that their first party lineup is much stronger than it ever was before.  Sony has IP like Uncharted, LBP, Infamous, Killzone, Ratchet & Clank, God of War.  These are a pretty big deal.
 
Sony can't release another console at this point.  I don't like the MS can either.  These new consoles would just be too expensive and the difference in the eyes of the average consumer will be so minor.  Nintendo is the only one that truly has to upgrade since they don't even support modern TV formats.  But for Sony and MS motion control is the ideal upgrade, and since that doesn't require a new console, why piss away the userbase you already have?

[BlackNMild2k1]

Sony spent billions on creating Cell and Blu ray so that is where most of the cost of PS3 was at.

Once BRD won it's format war, all manufacturers adopted Blu ray and now the price of drives went down. also since the PS3 has sold well (despite it's high price) Cell manufacturing has come down too. Most of PS3's price was Cell, Blu ray and putting a whole other PS2 inside of the system. RSX (the graphic chip) was not the major cost contributing factor.

MS made a system almost as powerful graphically as the PS3 and it's been cheaper than a Wii for years. MS is not taking much of a loss on Arcade units if it's taking one at all. Nintendo could easily produce a Wii2 with PS360+ level graphics and keep the price affordable in 2011 (1.75yrs from now) while still making a healthy profit.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

If they don't want to piss away their userbase, why are they introducing gimmick controls?

[broodwars]

If they don't want to piss away their userbase, why are they introducing gimmick controls?

Because the new "gimmick" controls don't drive away their old fans, just give new ones an opportunity to join the party.  New traditional and experimental games will still be made with traditional controls, which is something the Wii can't claim.  You're either with the motion control idea with that system or you don't own it, whereas it's just an option on the PS3.  Now, that probably spells Doom for the Move, but I don't see it negatively impacting their current fanbase.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Oh, that's right.

C'mon, Sony.  Ice Cream All the Way.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Actually it's the opposite on the Wii.
First and foremost you get motion controls, but there could always be an option for traditional controls too if the dev decided to include them. It made CC support very rare, but the option was there.
I suppose the same could happen to Move if traditional control is still the preferred setup and motion control is not pushed.

[Chozo Ghost]

And if Nintendo topped them how could Nintendo make that at a good price?  The PS3 is $300 so a superior Wii2 would probably be more than that.

Wrong. Because technology gets cheaper as it becomes better, thanks to something called Moore's law.

My first computer cost about $2,000 and had 32mb of RAM and a 166mhz Pentium 1 processor. About 5 years later I got a computer with 256mb of RAM and had a 933mhz Pentium 3 processor. This newer computer was magnitudes of level better than the old one, so you might think it cost more, right? Wrong, it cost about half as much. My most recent computer is a monster with 3gb of RAM and a 64-bit dual core processor. It cost me less than $300.

Can you see what I'm getting at here? The PS3 was cutting edge technology when it was released in 2006, but it isn't getting any better. The console's specs are frozen at that 2006 level, and will never get any better. 2006 era technology can still hold up in our 2010 world and doesn't look too dated yet, but it will inevitably.

Meanwhile, the Wii 2 can take advantage of not 2006 technology, but 2011 or 2012 era technology, and because of Moore's law we know this will be 1) superior to the best 2006 could offer, and 2) be cheaper as well.

Of course, you're probably thinking Nintendo won't make a revolutionary cutting edge console in 2011/2012 and you're probably right, but the thing is even low end technology of that time will still be better than the best 2006 had to offer. That's just how technology works. My most recent computer is actually pretty low-end by current computer standards, but compared to my old computer from 2002 there's no comparison. The 2002 computer was actually pretty high end for its day, but now a budget computer can kick its ass handedly.

And that's basically what I'm getting at here. Nintendo doesn't need to make a high-end $500 console in order to beat the PS3 in 2011-2012. Nintendo can just use more modest components and still cobble together a system that can kick the PS3's ass, just because those components are 5-6 years more modern.

I think Sony boasted their cell processor would defeat Moore's law, but that won't be the case. Newer, better, and cheaper stuff always comes out. Before you know it the Cell processor will seem as dated as a Pentium 1, or whatever chip the Atari 2600 used.

[Guitar Smasher]

I think the real question is will the xbox720 actually be two xbox360s taped together?

[nickmitch]

I think the real question is will the xbox720 actually be two xbox360s taped together?

They'll be welded. The tape would either melt or catch fire.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Imagine the Nyko Deep Freeze(TM) refridgerator you'd have to buy for the power supply.

[Ian Sane]

If they don't want to piss away their userbase, why are they introducing gimmick controls?

How does this piss away any customers at all?  It's just an option.  Releasing a new console that only added motion control would piss away their userbase.  Sticking with the PS3 and just adding motion control to it will keep their userbase.
 

 Wrong. Because technology gets cheaper as it becomes better, thanks to something called Moore's law.

I am aware that my Dad's old IBM XT cost more than any other computer he's ever owned, despite it being vastly inferior.  But if I was releasing mass quantities of inferior hardware now wouldn't it still cost less than what's brand new.  Right now a PS3 is $300 while the Move is expected to be about $100.  So if we consider Move to be Sony's next gen we're looking at a $400 price.  But that's today.  By the time the Wii 2 is released I'm assuming it would be lower in price.  How is Nintendo going to make something the same price with state-of-the-art technology?  I would assume that as the PS3 becomes older it would become cheaper to make.
 
Yeah the Xbox 360 Arcade is the same price as a Wii right now but the Arcade is compromised since it lacks a hard drive (the Elite would be the closer comparison to a PS3) and the Wii is overpriced.  Nintendo intentionally marks it up.  Based on pure cost the technologically inferior Wii does not cost more to make than the other consoles.  It isn't about the price but the potential price.  How much more than the PS3 can Nintendo go where they can offer a comparible price point?  The Blu-Ray drive is the only thing I can see that could limit Sony and that Nintendo would not have to match.
 
Though perhaps Nintendo's goal isn't to be to match Sony in price but that they just a price in mind and they just have to be below or at it.  So Sony can have as low of a price as they want but all Nintendo cares about is that they're affordable.
 
Honestly if Nintendo gets the third party support a market leading console deserves by eliminating the hardware gap, Sony can't compete.  The only company that can beat Nintendo is themselves.  Atari beat Atari, Nintendo beat Nintendo, Sony beat Sony.  The way to get ahead in the console industry is to be as close to perfect as you can and take advantage when the other guy fucks up.  Right now that's all Sony or MS can do.  If Nintendo loses the top spot it will be because they will do something to themselves that will kill interest in the Wii 2.

[BlackNMild2k1]

The Xbox 360 Arcade is $200 and that is most likely at a small profit margin and it has no HDD
the Wii is $200 and more than likely a very generous to OMG are you kidding profit margin with no HDD

If Wii just did the minimum and matched the 360 graphically with chips from today and not 2006 with smaller manufacturing from the start(45nm or better), you could get a HD 360 level Wii at the current price of a Wii and Nintendo would still be making a profit on every system sold.
Now fast forward 1.75 years, using a state of the art chip today (late 2009/early 2010) that Nintendo spends the next 1.5 years shrinking and making cost effective, then you cold have a noticeable leap over PS360 without raising the cost to the consumer ($250) and still getting a favorable profit margin for Nintendo.